Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Education Law
Building An Appropriate Education From Board Of Education V. Rowley: Razing The Door And Raising The Floor, Perry A. Zirkel
Building An Appropriate Education From Board Of Education V. Rowley: Razing The Door And Raising The Floor, Perry A. Zirkel
Maryland Law Review
No abstract provided.
Modifying The New York State Public School Financing Formula After Levittown, Elizabeth M. Flinn
Modifying The New York State Public School Financing Formula After Levittown, Elizabeth M. Flinn
Fordham Urban Law Journal
Spending on public education is primarily an obligation of state legislature and local school districts in the United States. Legislatures determine not only the amount of education spending, but also how much money is to be given to specific school districts. As a result, there have been growing discrepancies over how much financial assistance one district will have over another, leaving children from poor and fiscally overburdened districts at a disadvantage. This Note focuses on the New York case, Levittown v. Nyquist, as well as the New York funding formula, and ultimately recommends adoption of a school finance system that …
Attack On The Eha: The Education For All Handicapped Children Act After Board Of Education V. Rowley, Karl Boettner
Attack On The Eha: The Education For All Handicapped Children Act After Board Of Education V. Rowley, Karl Boettner
Seattle University Law Review
The Rowley Court had the opportunity to reverse state erosions of the EHA. Unfortunately, the Court ratified and encouraged such attacks. The Court's educational benefit standard demands as little as Washington's "suitable education" standard. The Rowley Court suggested a way to sidestep the IEP process which is similar to Washington's avoidance method. Finally, the Court eliminated judicial review of state administrative decisions regarding educational standards and the educational programs of handicapped children. The Rowley Court justified this elimination by claiming that parental ardor and participation in the IEP process were sufficient remaining safeguards for handicapped children. However, effective exclusion of …